[ad_1]
The petitioner for the 2020 election petition said a second round was necessary because no candidate in the polls on Dec. 7 polled 50% of valid votes.
The case of former President John Mahama is that in addition to fundamental constitutional breaches committed by Presidential Election Returning Officer Jean Mensa, the figures announced in the December 9, 2020 statement, no candidate obtained more than 50% of valid votes. throw away.
This, he said, as a constitutional consequence, a second round of elections would be necessary.
These appeared in former President John Dramani Mahama, the petitioner’s closing speech filed by his lawyers at the Supreme Court.
Mr. Mahama argued that the evidence from the terms of the statement and the consideration which the President of the EC called the basis of the statement reveals that “Nana could only be credited with 49.625% of the vote at the time . “
Mr Mahama said: “The fact that he did not indicate in his petition what he or the other candidates should have achieved in relation to the figures declared by the EC does not mean that the statement of the boss of the THIS is constitutional. “
According to Mr. Mahama, his own figures “are not relevant in determining whether this allegation is founded or not”.
The petitioner called on the court to take judicial notice of the fact that before the elections of December 7, 2020, political parties were urged not to seek to announce results on the basis of the figures they had gathered but to await the official declaration of the boss of the EC as the returning officer for the presidential election.
He explained that the EC, by virtue of the provisions of Articles 43-54, 56 (7), 63 and 65 of the Constitution and CI 127, is responsible for the conduct of the elections.
Mr Mahama stated that ‘the utterly untenable nature of the claim which the petitioner should have made with regard to his own figures is highlighted when it is recalled that under Article 64 (1) of the Constitution, any citizen of Ghana may present a petition challenging the validity of the election of the President.
A citizen, by presenting such a challenge, would not be required to indicate the exact number of votes that the candidates should have obtained. Being a candidate does not change the qualification to present such a petition and cannot demand more than any other citizen.
He recalled that “nobody asks Nana Addo to bring his figures or the number of votes that he and other candidates obtained, nor indicated his figures in this petition because it would have no relevance in court before the court.”
As a result, the Applicant has discharged his burden of proof.
The petitioner claims that “the unsigned press release not only corrected the incorrect total of valid votes cast announced by Ms Jean Mensa in her statement of December 9, 2020.
She also adjusted the votes obtained by candidates Mahama and Akufo-Addo as declared for them on December 9, 2020. The votes of the other candidates have also been adjusted.
All this, Mahama said, was done outside the framework provided by CI 127 and in particular, without the involvement of the candidates’ agents, contrary to the requirement of Articles 49 (2) and (3) of the Constitution and of the Regulation 44 (10) of CI127.
“Paragraphs 29-30 of the amended petition are very clear on how the press release issued on December 10, 2020 exacerbates the lack of transparency, fairness and candor of the first respondent (EC) in the ever-changing numbers The petitioner mentioned.
Further, he stated that the figure for the alleged “correction” regarding the total valid votes cast had itself been repudiated by the first respondent (EC) by the time the response to the petition was filed on January 9, 2021. .
“The fact that the First Respondent (CE) issued a ‘correction’ on December 10, 2020 to a single digit which is now claimed to have been the actual number claimed on Form 13 on December 9, 2020 defied logic.”
Mr Mahama said: “Amidst the evolution of the numbers of total valid votes cast as well as individual candidate votes, it simply cannot be said that the overall results on Form 13 have not been affected. , in particular when the figures claimed to have been from Form 13 are different from the figures of the ‘correction’ of December 10, 2020. “
He argued that there were discrepancies in the figures provided for candidates from other parties and that “Akuffo-Addo’s substantial increase while materially reducing the petitioner’s votes clearly requires explanation.”
The former president said that basically there was no evidence from the EC on the basis of which any of his conflicting claims could be accepted as “the truth”.
He considered that the attempt “to effect a correction by an unsigned press release is totally untenable”.
According to the petitioner, the testimony of the three witnesses of the petitioner clearly showed not only the breach of the duty to be fair and frank under article 23 of the Constitution, but also the lack of due process within the meaning of article 296 of the Constitution.
He argued that when questions of violation of the constitution or statute arose in court, there was an urgent need to remedy such violations.
Mr Mahama declared the conduct of the President of the EC in sending the agents of a major candidate who should have been present in resolving the outstanding issues leading up to the declaration and “going immediately to make the declaration without even the steps required under Regulation 44 (10) were patently unreasonable. “
Source link
